Mac Pro Refesh in March

13468919

Comments

  • hmmhmm Posts: 3,355member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post




    Yeah, if your display fails, having to send back your computer isn't good but if they allowed you to remove storage, you could always pull the drive, plug it into another machine via enclosure e.g cheap backup Mini and keep working as normal. This covers you for failures beyond the display too.



    That wouldn't be too bad. The reality here is that I won't buy an imac. If a mini or macbook pro covered everything I wanted at some point, I'd use one of those. It still has the unremovable display thing going sadly, but it doesn't take up a lot of desk space, so I'd still have the big displays up and running. The thing about imacs is that they kill a lot of the things I see as advantages in a desktop system. With the mini it's still a little lacking on external storage options. Many raids use internal pci cards. Yes there is thunderbolt, but it hasn't been tested as being that amazing when shared with a display. If we see a point where this creates a fairly robus solution, I may go for that. I probably won't invest in another expensive enclosure until it starts to look practical to go for an ssd based one. At the very least i'd want one that is 2.5" ssd friendly. Hard drive enclosures are not something I like to update every couple years.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I expect they will get rid of the PCI slots from their motherboards eventually (3rd party motherboards will likely keep them), the PCI standard itself will remain given that Thunderbolt just joins PCI and displayport together. This slot removal helps Intel stifle GPU competition and boost Thunderbolt support (which hurts AMD). They are supposedly bringing in optical parts this year:



    http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/20...-next-year.ars



    While the speeds likely won't be much faster with current ports, it means further distances.







    Yeah, fluid sims and smoke sims do take up a lot but the following examples are quite high resolution and use less than 12GB RAM:



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrJHn9sBAZQ

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RolbMDrDF60

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFxzk0tuaW4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TawnuP5xPo4

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfVImNxiJLY



    The second video apparently generated 400GB of simulation data. For an individual artist, those examples probably represent the limit of what they'd need to render, like if you render TV commercials with fluid sims.




    I'm with you on much of this. With ram I look at price too. Total machine cost matters. If you're wondering why I like absurd amounts of ram, you're skipping over it somewhat. Some programs can hold things like construction history in ram or use it in place of scratch disks or the system pagefile. Obviously 400GB won't fit in ram, but where allowed, I use ram in place of swap space. This means much larger values can be addressed. It grants a little increase in smoothness, and as long as you're not buying the highest densities, it's pretty cheap. If you're talking about something like one of the dual socket pros, 32GB is cheap because you're not having to use the highest density sticks. As you said it's also nice not having to quit out applications. We were running on 32 bit limits not that long ago. People still accomplished work (more than I am by typing this reply hehe). People built up working habits and compromises around those limits. Given how much can be allocated to ram these days, ram hunger will probably increase further like a stampede of rampaging zombies (can't find a good gif file, although without Steve Jobs as the lead zombie it wouldn't be as funny) unless they're heavily influenced by the uprise of devices like the Air and Ipad.



    Again I'd point you to how ram used to be measured in kilobytes.
  • lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,088member
    Quote:

    RUSH: I did. I started e-mailing then. I started e-mailing with that computer. I don?t remember what the program was. Was some ? whatever was built into the IIc and quickly then went to the Macintosh after a year. But no, I?ve had every top-of-the-line Mac desktop that there is. Every time they came out with a new revision, I got one. (interruption) No, I think they?re gonna have one more rev of the Mac Pro in the third quarter of this year and then it?s probably done. One more rev, and I can?t wait ?cause it?s the only thing they?ve got that doesn?t have Thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is this wicked fast data transfer. It?s about twice as fast as FireWire 800.



    Macdailynews related story/link.



    Last few lines were interesting...



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacTac View Post


    How come you get it but Apple doesn't?



    Honestly I don't think Apple gets it, or maybe more specifically doesn't care! Let's face it they concentrate on laptops with updates and novel design whereas the desktop line has been stagnant for years. It is no surprise that most of their Mac growth comes from Laptops, as few an justify any of the desktop machines.



    So yeah I get it. Apple seemingly doesn't care.
  • hmmhmm Posts: 3,355member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Macdailynews related story/link.



    Last few lines were interesting...



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    Twice as fast as firewire 800. That isn't exactly the limit on speed. It looks fast because it's new, but firewire 800 has been out for at least a decade or so right? I can't remember what model started it, but it's been a long damn time.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Honestly I don't think Apple gets it, or maybe more specifically doesn't care! Let's face it they concentrate on laptops with updates and novel design whereas the desktop line has been stagnant for years. It is no surprise that most of their Mac growth comes from Laptops, as few an justify any of the desktop machines.



    So yeah I get it. Apple seemingly doesn't care.



    Like I said, you guys should consider that they've potentially spun off development just like manufacturing on this one. They focus a lot on trends and I see computer furniture becoming a less common purchase.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Misa View Post


    I stopped reading the second you said "get rid of" , I think you completely misunderstand what the Mac Pro is used for.



    Maybe he does or maybe not. I think the motivation to get rid of it is more to do with sales. It really doesn't matter what it issued for, if sales are constantly shrinking there is a business case for dis continuing the Mac Pro.

    Quote:

    The Mac Pro is the end-user configurable workstation or server option that the MacMini does not fit in.



    - Xeon DP/UP processors

    - ECC RAM

    - Multiple GPU's

    - Multiple drives in RAID arrays

    - PCIe slots for specific DSP cards (Music, live HD video switching, etc)



    I don't dismiss any of the above, it is just that they are issues that don't matter. If Apple can't strengthen sales the Pro will die.

    Quote:

    Instead of having 60 different throw-away configurations, you have just base configurations, which saves Apple engineering costs. There is no "regular desktop model" because that is the MacMini/iMac. That's the model for people who never upgrade a thing.



    Neither the Mini nor the iMac are desktops in the sense of this discussion. Rather they are special purpose computers. Apple really doesn't have a desktop, because as you note the Pro is targetted at and priced for a different market.

    Quote:

    Apple could do something like this...

    Mac Pro and MacMini Pro



    The Mac Pro has familiar configurations with the full complement of expansion ports.



    The MacMiniPro instead is designed for clustering (more like your suggestion) which allow the mini's to either be daisy chained using two TB ports, Two GigE Ethernet ports or ring/hub configurations. These also have ECC memory. Each would have an external 16 link PCIe 3.0 cable port (Thunderbolt is only 4 link) That port also solves drive expandability issue by leaving both the TB ports and the external PCIe free to connect to external drive arrays.



    Such a configuration would be a no go.

    Quote:

    But I think short of silly situations (Think about the military's use of PS3's in a cluster) there is little demand for this except maybe from Macmini Colo.



    You are mixing technologies here. A cluster, at least in the sense of scientific computing is a significantly different implementation than an installation of stand alone servers.

    Quote:

    It could conceivably give an Apple answer to blade systems. It's also messy which is why I don't see Apple doing it, and Apple "OS X" servers aren't any more useful than FreeBSD or Linux systems if they're only going to be used as web servers.



    Which is why nobody was buying Apple server hardware.



    As to compute clusters, what is messy is your configurations of the MiniPros (XMacs). Such a platform needs internal expansion/configuarability to be practicle in such an application. In that sense you need a slot for the connection fabric of your choice. Interestingly here would be Thunderbolts potential in such applications. It is still not clear that a hub or router could be configured for the creation of low cost compute clusters.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hmm View Post


    Twice as fast as firewire 800. That isn't exactly the limit on speed. It looks fast because it's new, but firewire 800 has been out for at least a decade or so right? I can't remember what model started it, but it's been a long damn time.









    Like I said, you guys should consider that they've potentially spun off development just like manufacturing on this one. They focus a lot on trends and I see computer furniture becoming a less common purchase.



    Your point or lack of one above perplexes me as I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The fact is there has been no real development with respect to the desktop line up for years now. Hell I'd be happy if they spun off development to somebody that would bring new ideas and concepts to the desktop hardware. As to trends Apple starts them! The new isnt an excuse to ignore the old ough, desktops won't go away anytime soon. I still see them becoming a homes digital hub to support those ultra new portable iOS devices.
  • lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,088member
    I looked on the Mac Pro thread at Macrumors discussing the future of Mac Pro's thread. Some really good arguments.



    I think you're right Dave. Apple doesn't 'care.' If we cross our fingers we may just get another Mac Pro update. (Which will last for another 3 years-ish.) By then maybe the iMac will be ready with 8 core 16 hyper threaded cores to succeed the throne? And Thunderbolt will augment whatever's missing.



    Mac Mini and iMac as 'specialised' machines? I don't see that at all. They're the perfect consumer/prosumer desktops for the mainstream. Perhaps the laptops are the new desktop and with portability. 'Specialised.' Isn't the Mac Pro? Even more so? Isn't that it's problem? it's so specialised and marginalised by that because the iMac has more than sufficient power for probably 99% of creators. The iMac is gradually eating it's lunch. Heck, the laptop is eating the iMac's lunch. Just as SGi had their specialised workstations eaten by cheaper Wintel boxes, so the Mac Pro is having it's market erroded by ever more capable consumer/prosumer machines which are democratising power into the mainstream. Ironic that the Mac is eating the Wintel PC market in growth. (Fussy Wintel machines typified by the 'classic' tower, a mass of wires and the clumsy windows. iMacs and Apple laptops just outclass the competition. Now it's PC makers that can't compete with Apple on price eg Macbook Air.) Just look at Final Cut Pro. Powerful prosumer software and powerful prosumer machines. Apple's moving where the mainstream is. They have been since they removed 'computer' from their name.



    The Mac Pro sold about 100k units about 5-7 years ago...back when Apple still did break downs of each model sales wise.



    I wonder how many it sells now? If it's less than that...40-60k in sales...that's not much more than the Cube when it got 'put on ice.'



    It's entry model is £1250 overpriced compared to 'most' towers. To get a very below average machine that is stale as old bread. Apple. Have they ever done towers right? The G3 blue and whites were ok. But the G4 and G5 heading up the food chain was an artificial. Not surprisingly, many creators find £2045 to get an entry tower off putting. Compounded by a World Economy in the toilet? How many people want to pay £3000+ just to get a monitor and an old 'has been' tower spec with laughably old parts...vs a fully loaded iMac for a grand less in price.



    Barefeats has benches of the 3.4 i7 iMac all over the 6 core Mac Pro in Photoshop, Aftereffects...etc. Traditional areas of supremacy. But no longer. At least not for the entry to mid level Pro. And there's the rub. Just add a Thunderbolt external/Raid/HDs for the knockout blow. The top end iMac power is only going to move downwards..!



    Sure. People who like towers are never going to like the iMac. But it's clear that the power in the iMac and the Macbook Pro have converted many creators and consumers over from the quintessential 'Windows' and 'Tower' = PC.



    Not being 'tower' is exactly how Apple differentiated the Mac from PC. Iconically different in terms of the iMac. (But wasn't it always so? Apple II, original Mac, the iMac, the Macbook Air. That's alot of history right there. All landmark products for Apple. The iPad too. There's nothing historically 'tower-ish about Apple, is there?) Thin vs Fat in Laptops. Leaving old tech' behind. Old approaches behind. How many consecutive quarters has the Mac smashed the PC in growth?



    Well, what they sell in their stores are iMacs and Minis. People are buying them. Buying wayyyy more laptops though. That's the way it is. It's working for Apple. With record Mac sales. But not record Pro sales? The drive of the Mac growth is laptops...under the shiny halo of iOS devices and the 'Class of their Own' Apple Stores.



    So maybe they do get it? Other's may be in 'denial' about it. But the days of Apple tower sales of 250k-500k a quarter are over. The last time I checked it had just over 100k in sales. That was a lifetime ago...and prices have gone up since then, especially on the entry to mid range. If they made the mini Tower Dave wants and priced it from £795 to £1495 and split the margins between it and the Apple display...then, sure, it might have a chance to stave off the inevitable. If you could grid those 'mini cube towers' together...you could add extra cpu/storage in a modular way over time. But are Apple showing any signs they'll do that? Any?! (Nobody wants a mini-tower/Cube more than me. But they didn't get it right the last time. They can't help themselves with pricing. However, the pricing of Air suggests hope. The pricing of iPad suggests hope. But the form factor of the 'tower' doesn't. Why haven't they changed the form factor of the Mac Pro into a mini-tower before now? Is it worth the investment? Is it Apple? Is it distinct enough? *looks.



    Back when Apple 'only' offered beige towers with the odd pizza box they were never outstandingly popular despite good machines like the 604e chip. They barely sold 1 million a quarter. It wasn't until the iMac came to Apple's rescue that things began to change.



    Apple's business is now a portable business. Tower buyers may not like that. But Apple are smashing HP ((who have huge volume of PCs but comparatively slender margins and poor diversification or Eco system compared to Apple)), Dell, ((Same problem with Dell...who are now stewing in their own gravy after the race to the bottom which they helped in...)) (..etc and the usual suspects...), M$ and Google in terms of profitability because Apple knows where the puck is headed. And that may mean the tower gets left behind. It's still a substantial market...but it got overtaken good and proper by laptops. Netbooks looked like the new kid on the block until the iPad kicked it's arse out the ring. The rate of miniaturisation of power is outstripping traditional computing markets. Who wants to pull their hair out surfing on a windows tower when you can sit on the sofa with an iPad? No competition. Like wise, by the time Apple gets its sh*t together with the ATV, the 'home hub server' will be an iMac or a Mini (a mere hair breadth away with i7s about to consolidate on the line and the Integrated '4000' imminent) or laptop or an iPad. It won't be a clunky tower (the 'under the desk desktop...')



    If it isn't profitable...(how many will buy the Pro at that price?) Apple aren't going to make it. It's not the consumer/prosumer flagship anymore. The iMac is it. But even that is eclipsed by the Tsunami...the sea shift towards portability...and ultra portability.



    Apple gets it.



    Not sure their competition does...



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,088member
    http://macdailynews.com/2012/02/25/n...and-full-year/



    'That, Mr. Anderson...is the sound of...inevitability.'



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    I looked on the Mac Pro thread at Macrumors discussing the future of Mac Pro's thread. Some really good arguments.



    I think you're right Dave. Apple doesn't 'care.' If we cross our fingers we may just get another Mac Pro update. (Which will last for another 3 years-ish.) By then maybe the iMac will be ready with 8 core 16 hyper threaded cores to succeed the throne? And Thunderbolt will augment whatever's missing.



    You keep falling back on iMac benchmarks which is really asinine in a discussion about the Mac Pro. It is pretty much a given that single processor desktop chips will out perform the cores in Xeon chips. It has been that way for years, the only difference is that Apple is now equipping the iMac with much higher performance chips than in the past. The problem with your perspective is that almost nobody buys a Pro based on single core performance.

    Quote:

    Mac Mini and iMac as 'specialised' machines? I don't see that at all. They're the perfect consumer/prosumer desktops for the mainstream.



    They aren't bad machines but their is nothing perfect about them. The problem is that if you try to implement them in business they are only implementable in limited cases thus special purpose machines.



    Like it or not, at work the iT department standardizes around one Dell chassis. This allows them to have a cheap platform for the desktop, and a configurable platform for the plant. They see it as being economical, though at times I disagree. In any event Apple has no play at all for organizations with this mindset. Apple simply doesn't have an economical all purpose chassis that can take on a large number of roles in an organization.

    Quote:

    Perhaps the laptops are the new desktop and with portability. 'Specialised.' Isn't the Mac Pro?



    Exactly, the Mac Pro is a specialized computer with very limited appeal. An appeal that is even more constrained by the high price. Thus my statement that Apple really doesn't have a desktop play.

    Quote:

    Even more so? Isn't that it's problem? it's so specialised and marginalised by that because the iMac has more than sufficient power for probably 99% of creators. The iMac is gradually eating it's lunch.



    If that was the case the iMac would be showing really strong growth. It isn't so I'm not convinced that it is the machine for creators. in fact I'm pretty much convinced that it isn't as it appears that most iMac sales are not going to professionals of any sort. If anything I really see Apple loosing sales to creators or professional users with its desktop line up.

    Quote:

    Heck, the laptop is eating the iMac's lunch. Just as SGi had their specialised workstations eaten by cheaper Wintel boxes, so the Mac Pro is having it's market erroded by ever more capable consumer/prosumer machines which are democratising power into the mainstream. Ironic that the Mac is eating the Wintel PC market in growth. (Fussy Wintel machines typified by the 'classic' tower, a mass of wires and the clumsy windows. iMacs and Apple laptops just outclass the competition. Now it's PC makers that can't compete with Apple on price eg Macbook Air.)



    Ironic, I don't think so as it is more or less expected of an industry that spent all of its engineering resources on lowering costs and standardized functionality. Even then the big issue on the PC front is Windows not the hardware. In a sense Apple is beating up on the PC world with the same hardware that is available to the PC world. So again it is an issue of engineering orientation and poor software as demonstrated by Windows.

    Quote:

    Just look at Final Cut Pro. Powerful prosumer software and powerful prosumer machines. Apple's moving where the mainstream is. They have been since they removed 'computer' from their name.



    Well we could pull this thread off track significantly by discussing Final Cut Pro. However I don't see it as a "Prosumer" play at all. Rather it is a start on a thoroughly modern professional environment for video editing.



    It is rather indicative of the PC mind set of many video professionals in that they can't see beyond the past. Final Cut Pro is a lot like the first AIR, which was a great concept that came up short in a number of ways. Given reasonable time the AIR has turned into an impressive little machine. Likewise Final Cut is a platform that will grow and morph into something that really has no competition.

    [quote]

    The Mac Pro sold about 100k units about 5-7 years ago...back when Apple still did break downs of each model sales wise.

    [/qoute]

    They could be very well be at one tenth that now. I have a very hard time believeing that the Pro is selling well at all these days.

    Quote:

    I wonder how many it sells now? If it's less than that...40-60k in sales...that's not much more than the Cube when it got 'put on ice.'



    Exactly!!! This is why I shake my head when people say the Pro will not be killed. One of the best choices Apple has is to roll the Pro and Mini into a box that covers a wide range of capability. The goal being to leverage as many common parts as possible into a platform that will generate sales based upon current Mini and Pro users but also new users not currently interested in these platforms. XMac is the term used to describe these machines, but the key here is a family of devices that serve the needs of many different users.

    Quote:

    It's entry model is £1250 overpriced compared to 'most' towers. To get a very below average machine that is stale as old bread. Apple. Have they ever done towers right? The G3 blue and whites were ok. But the G4 and G5 heading up the food chain was an artificial. Not surprisingly, many creators find £2045 to get an entry tower off putting. Compounded by a World Economy in the toilet? How many people want to pay £3000+ just to get a monitor and an old 'has been' tower spec with laughably old parts...vs a fully loaded iMac for the same price.



    To be honest here I really don't think you get the Pro and the limited markets it serves. The price means nothing to the people that really need the platform for its capabilities. It is not unlike the server world where 1U servers make up the bulk of the business yet 5U servers still have a market. The Mac Pro is a lot like the 5U server world where if you need it you buy it. The problem in Apples case is the limited number of compelling reasons to buy a Mac Pro.

    Quote:

    Barefeats has benches of the 3.4 i7 iMac all over the 6 core Mac Pro in Photoshop, Aftereffects...etc. Traditional areas of supremacy. But no longer.



    Yeah yeah yeah, you keep bringing up benchmarks favorable to the iMac which means absolutely nothing! There are plenty of other benches where the Pro will trounce the iMac.

    Quote:

    At least not for the entry to mid level Pro. And there's the rub. Just add a Thunderbolt external/Raid/HDs for the knockout blow. The top end iMac power is only going to move downwards..!



    As iMac power increases so does the Mac Pros. The knock out blow simply isn't there as they aren't even playing in the same ring.

    Quote:

    Sure. People who like towers are never going to like the iMac. But it's clear that the power in the iMac and the Macbook Pro have converted many creators and consumers over from the quintessential 'Windows' and 'Tower' = PC.



    Windows no more equals tower PC than Mac OS equals laptop. I still maintain that Apples success with laptops has a lot to do with the fact that no body wants to buy their desktop hardware because for the most part the offerings are pathetic. It has been multiple years now since Apple has put in anything significant engineering wise in the desktop arena. I'd be willing to guess that each laptop rev gets more engineering time than all of the desktops put together.



    This can be seen in the hardware for the various be desktops apple sells. The engineering is serviceable but hardly inspiring.

    Quote:

    Not being 'tower' is exactly how Apple differentiated the Mac from PC. Iconically different in terms of the iMac. Thin vs Fat in Laptops. Leaving old tech' behind. Old approaches behind. How many consecutive quarters has the Mac smashed the PC in growth?



    Where is the vast majority of that growth coming from? It is the laptop line up with desktop sales marginal at best.



    As to differentiation that is a function of Mac OS more than anything. When it comes right down to it Apples laptops are not all that different than the laptops in the PC world. you can argue all you want about design but that really has nothing to do with it, it is all about software.

    Quote:

    Well, what they sell in their stores are iMacs and Minis. People are buying them. Buying wayyyy more laptops though. That's the way it is. It's working for Apple. With record Mac sales. But not record Pro sales? The drive of the Mac growth is laptops...under the shiny halo of iOS devices and the 'Class of their Own' Apple Stores.



    This is the problem laptop sales are booming while desktop sales in many cases are shrinking. However you fail to ask why. I answer that simply, the desktop lineup for the most part is pathetic. There has been zero innovation on the desktop in over six years now.

    Quote:

    So maybe they do get it? Other's may be in 'denial' about it. But the days of Apple tower sales of 250k-500k a quarter are over. The last time I checked it had just over 100k in sales.



    Sadly I don't think the Pro sales are even close to 100k anymore.

    Quote:

    That was a lifetime ago...and prices have gone up since then, especially on the entry to mid range. If they made the mini Tower Dave wants and priced it from £795 to £1495 and split the margins between it and the Apple display...then, sure, it might have a chance to stave off the inevitable. If you could grid those 'mini cube towers' together...you could add extra cpu/storage in a modular way over time. But are Apple showing any signs they'll do that?



    Interestingly they did have a patent granted a year or two ago for a new computer chassis. Sadly it looked like they did nothing but to shrink the box. So no I don't see any signs of rethink as far as the desktop lineup goes.



    By the way when talking about the XMac I dont see it as a tower from the past, rather I see it as a platform for the future. As such I would expect plenty of innovation like is seen in the laptops.

    Quote:

    Any?! (Nobody wants a mini-tower/Cube more than me. But they didn't get it right the last time. They can't help themselves with pricing. However, the pricing of Air suggests hope. The pricing of iPad suggests hope. But the form factor of the 'tower' doesn't. Why haven't they changed the form factor of the Mac Pro into a mini-tower before now? Is it worth the investment? Is it Apple? Is it distinct enough? *looks.



    Well the tower for the Pro is easy to understand, why get into mechanical design if your sales are too thin to pay off that design.

    Quote:

    Back when Apple 'only' offered beige towers with the odd pizza box they were never outstandingly popular despite good machines like the 604e chip. They barely sold 1 million a quarter. It wasn't until the iMac came to Apple's rescue that things began to change.



    Well it is pretty easy to understand the sales issues with those old Macs, the price was often too high. I was one of the original Mac Plus owners back in the day, it was very hard to justify that purchase back then. I used that machine until it was unbearably slow and then switched to PC hardware mostly running Linux. The problem was pretty clear the hardware costs where unacceptable to stay with a Mac, not to mention that the operating system was getting long in the tooth back then.



    Now Apple has a highly mixed line up. Some of the laptops can be seen as bargains, the iMac isn't too bad either. But the Mini and Pro are far different machines and basically over priced. It isn't as bad as in the post Mac Plus days but you still have a lack of choice on the desktop.

    Quote:

    Apple's business is now a portable business. Tower buyers may not like that. But Apple are smashing HP ((who have huge volume of PCs but comparatively slender margins and poor diversification or Eco system compared to Apple)), Dell, ((Same problem with Dell...who are now stewing in their own gravy after the race to the bottom which they helped in...)) (..etc and the usual suspects...), M$ and Google in terms of profitability because Apple knows where the puck is headed. And that may mean the tower gets left behind.



    That may well be the case but that doesn't mean the need for an XMac (which may or may not be a tower) goes away. In fact if the market is indeed heading away from the desktop then it only makes more sense to rationalize the desktop lineup for that future.

    Quote:

    It's still a substantial market...but it got overtaken good and proper by laptops. Netbooks looked like the new kid on the block until the iPad kicked it's arse out the ring. The rate of miniaturisation of power is outstripping traditional computing markets. Who wants to pull their hair out surfing on a windows tower when you can sit on the sofa with an iPad? No competition.



    An interesting point as I sit at my desk with iPad in hand. It is notable that even though I'm 3G connected this iPad is a better net access machine than most of the computers I've ever owned. However that does not make it a Mac OS device replacement.

    Quote:

    Like wise, by the time Apple gets its sh*t together with the ATV, the 'home hub server' will be an iMac or a Mini (a mere hair breadth away with i7s about to consolidate on the line and the Integrated '4000' imminent) or laptop or an iPad. It won't be a clunky tower (the 'under the desk desktop...')



    I don't see the need for a home hub ever going away. The problem is Apple doesn't have a really good hub machine. It simply doesn't have a machine with easy access to disk drive bays which are critical for a hub device as storage and back up are a critical part of a hubs functionality.

    Quote:

    If it isn't profitable...(how many will buy the Pro at that price?) Apple aren't going to make it. It's not the consumer/prosumer flagship anymore. The iMac is it. But even that is eclipsed by the Tsunami...the sea shift towards portability...and ultra portability.



    The interesting thing here is that I'm not sure my next Mac will be a laptop. Why? Well because of those ultra portable iOS devices. If iOS and the associated hardware evolves in the right direction I might not need a laptop and the associated compromises that come with a laptop in the future.



    This I can see a shift back to desktops and the enhanced functionality they have.

    Quote:

    Apple gets it.



    Not sure their competition does...



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    I'm not sure Apple gets it. I see iOS devices driving a change in the computing landscape that maybe even Apple doesn't fully grasp. For example my iPhone 3G was nice but the move to iPhone 4 was very enlightening. It is a far better platform for mobile needs than the old 3G, a rather surprising improvement for two years. I have some time before I purchase my next Mac or iPhone but I can see the possibility of iPhone and iPad eliminating my Mac needs. It really depends upon enhanced functionality in both the hardware and software.



    So if iOS does get to the point where I really don't need the laptop why would I buy one in the future? Especially when I can implement a desktop without the limitations of a laptop. That is a larger screen and significant storage space.



    I'm really interested in seeing what happens in two years after iPad3 and the next iPhone are released. Will Apple continue the strong laptop sales? Will desktops suddenly strengthen? You see I'm certain Apple has a vision but the user community tends to go its own way to some extent. I can see the day when no body looks at laptops first for their portable needs. Apple is so darn close with the iPad now it almost hurts.
  • wizard69wizard69 Posts: 11,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    http://macdailynews.com/2012/02/25/n...and-full-year/



    'That, Mr. Anderson...is the sound of...inevitability.'



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    I can see the day when iPad has a sgnificant impact on Laptop sales for even Apple. The fact that Apple has taken such a lead with a machine with the hardware limitations of iPad is pretty impressive. If they solve some of the speed and memory limitations I can only see those numbers increasing. I expect iPad 3 to solve many of those issues with a faster processor, more RAM and Flash storage.



    However I think the difference here is that you see such devices as a replacement for desktops. I actually see them as a replacement for laptops. IPads could drive a resurgence in desktop hardware. Note I said desktop, not tower.
  • hmmhmm Posts: 3,355member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Your point or lack of one above perplexes me as I'm not sure what you are trying to say. The fact is there has been no real development with respect to the desktop line up for years now. Hell I'd be happy if they spun off development to somebody that would bring new ideas and concepts to the desktop hardware. As to trends Apple starts them! The new isnt an excuse to ignore the old ough, desktops won't go away anytime soon. I still see them becoming a homes digital hub to support those ultra new portable iOS devices.



    I was suggesting that we may be unlikely to see any truly impressive advancements in design if they've outsourced it and limited development to fitting the new hardware generation. We may see some kind of a hub like you stated. What I suggested was that they may have spun year to year design updates off to their manufacturer who also took over on logic boards as of 2009. I'm just not sure they care much about this market segment, or if they will try to cater to it with a truly evolved device in their lineup.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    I can see the day when iPad has a sgnificant impact on Laptop sales for even Apple. The fact that Apple has taken such a lead with a machine with the hardware limitations of iPad is pretty impressive. If they solve some of the speed and memory limitations I can only see those numbers increasing. I expect iPad 3 to solve many of those issues with a faster processor, more RAM and Flash storage.



    However I think the difference here is that you see such devices as a replacement for desktops. I actually see them as a replacement for laptops. IPads could drive a resurgence in desktop hardware. Note I said desktop, not tower.



    Apple has insane volume on these things and the higher end devices at a decent price point. Regarding desktop resurgence, it depends how the other devices function as standalone devices. Look at people in their 20s. Most of them do not purchase dedicated computer furniture any longer. A home server isn't an unreasonable concept. I just don't see a large resurgence coming up where people sit down at computers again outside of work. I mean there are still plenty of people that do this, but I don't think as many new ones are being added to the market.
  • lemon bon bon.lemon bon bon. Posts: 2,088member
    I was in an Apple store today. I was amazed just how just how dominant the iPad and Air are.



    One solitary Pro. ...and a reasonable group or so of iMacs.



    But all the hot and happening portable stuff at the front.



    I asked the sales girl, "Why don't Apple make a Mini Pro?"



    "That's what the Mini is for."



    "But what if I want more than a Mini?"



    "Then you need to pay £2000 for the Pro if you need that expandability."



    Hey, isn't it almost March already? *looks at thread title.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • rbrrbr Posts: 631member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    <snip>



    Hey, isn't it almost March already? *looks at thread title.



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    Tick, tick, tick.



    We'll see soon.



    I am not surprised that the Air & such is at the front of the store. It is more of an impulse purchase than a Mac Pro for one thing and for another, many of the Mac Pro sales are BTO through the home office.



    Cheers
  • joe the dragonjoe the dragon Posts: 66member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    If that's true, I suspect that Intel may have plans to end-of-life PCI -- at least PCI as we know it.

    .



    and get hit with a other anit trust law suit by AMD and nvidia by locking out there video cards?
  • mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe The Dragon View Post


    and get hit with a other anit trust law suit by AMD and nvidia by locking out there video cards?



    There is nothing in US or EU anti-trust law which can reasonably be construed as requiring Intel to support PCI forever.
  • joe the dragonjoe the dragon Posts: 66member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mcarling View Post


    There is nothing in US or EU anti-trust law which can reasonably be construed as requiring Intel to support PCI forever.



    but locking in Intel GPU / a intel only bus is anti-trust
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe The Dragon View Post


    but locking in Intel GPU / a intel only bus is anti-trust



    How? Next you'll be saying that AMD, Intel, and ARM should be forced to share all of their brand-specific processor enhancements with each other.
  • Here's Why - 3 problems but 3 solutions!



    Problem



    1) Mac Pro is a PC with server architecture (Intel Processor)

    2) OSX software is the main differentiator from PC's (no proprietary Mac CPU since G5)

    3) Apple is losing money hand over fist on the Mac Pro because mobile computing is the growth segment.



    Solution



    1) Sell Mac OSX like Microsoft sells Windows (Mac OSX Workstation and Server -currently sub $30- re-market at 15-20% above Microsoft.

    2) Sell a Mac Version of every worthy GPU for current and legacy Intel Mac Pro

    3) Sell Mac Pro Case (compete for custom PC market share) and market custom accessories.



    I may have simplified the resolution, but it simply requires a simple solution.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,982member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by theAPPLEcloud.com View Post


    Solution



    1) Sell Mac OSX like Microsoft sells Windows (available for any PC architecture)

    2) Support any GPU on any legacy Mac Pro

    3) Reconfigure Mac Pro Case to support any motherboard and market custom accessories.



    1. Abject nonsense.

    2. They would if ATI and nVidia would write drivers for them.

    3. Even more nonsensical than licensing OS X.



    You don't seem to understand Apple.
  • geneking7320geneking7320 Posts: 54member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    1. Abject nonsense.

    2. They would if ATI and nVidia would write drivers for them.

    3. Even more nonsensical than licensing OS X.



    You don't seem to understand Apple.



    I wonder is it economically possible for Apple to license OS X to one vendor which would produce Mac Pro level machines in the "better" and "best" category?

    The "good" Mac Pro could be replaced by the X-Mac.

    BTW, please interpret "economically possible" as profitable for Apple and affordable to those customers who presently desire those machines.
Sign In or Register to comment.